
Glass._ E 4 5 1 
Book ,l >n 



SPEECH OE 



«JP yT 



Representative from Carter and Johnson Counties, 

tbe Mouse of ifcepresentatrres, upon the Resolu- 
tions introduced l>y Mr. Buy less, in reference 

to the Harper's Ferry Insurrection. 



Mr. Speaker : "When I gave way for this House to 
adjourn on Saturday, I was attempting to answer the gentleman 
from Sumner, [Mr. Bennett,] and was going to say, that it was 
remarkably strange that he had occupied the public time nearly 
one and a half hours, and never mentioned the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Bedford, [Mr. WisenerJ that amendment 
being the question under consideration, and I repeat, it is remark- 
able, and I am at a loss how to account for it. Does he sympa- 
thize with the fire-eaters at the South ? and when we denounce 
them as enemies to our Union, do we tramp his toes ? I hope 
not. I entertain a different opinion of that gentleman. I can't 
believe such of him. Yet 1 am constrained by his own course in 
this debate to pause, and ask myseif the question, is it possible 
that such can be the fact? If such is not the fact, why did he not 
discuss the amendment, which is, that we ask our Representatives 
in Congress not to coalesce with the secessionist or disunionist of 
the South? Is there any thing wrong in that proposition? Are 
gentlemen upon the other side of this House afraid of making 
these Southern fire-eaters mad ? Are they for dissolving this 
Union ? I trust not. Then I hope gentlemen who may follow 
me in the discussion of the resolutions under consideration, will 
march up and discuss the amendment of the>gentleman from 
Bedford. 

Why shall we not, ask our Representatives not to unite with 
the fire-eaters and disunionists ? Is there no danger apprehended 
by the Union-loving and conservative people of this grand confede- 



f 



racy from and by the reckless and imprudent course of these 
fanatics South ? I believe, sir, there is great danger. I believe 
we have much to fear from them. I believe we have men South 
who would to-morrow sink the Union into oblivion, if they could 
advance their own interests. I believe we have men South who, 
for the Presidency of a Southern Confederacy, would deluge the 
South in blood in the twinkling of an eye. Have we nothing to 
base these opinions upon ? We unmistakably have. During the 
last contest for the Presidency, we heard Gov. Wise, of Virginia, 
publicly developing the scheme and the means of carrying out a 
dissolution of the Union. He spoke of a national civil war as 
what they would inevitably have to encounter, but that, he said, 
was not what he most deprecated. It was the neighborhood civil 
war. as he termed it, which they would have to carry on with the 
fifty thousand Unionists of Virginia that he deplored. What ! 
He deplored that there were fifty thousand citizens of the good 
Old Dominion who loved the union of these States — who were not 
willing to follow any distracted brain to overthrow this Union ! 
And to keep down and overcome these Union loving citizens, he 
would arm the negroes of Virginia ! Can 1 find language to 
express my condemnation of such sentiments ? Arm the negroes 
to murder the friends of the Union ! 

And further, Mr. Speaker, wc find a Southern Senator, the Hon. 
T. L. Clingman, of North Carolina, saying that they intended to 
put down the Union men of North Carolina by the swift attention 
of vigilance committees, that is, by organized assassination. And 
still further, the Democratic Administration organ, published at 
Washington under the control and nose of the President, admitted 
as an undisputed fact that there is a wide-spread and desperate 
conspiracy at the South for dissolving the Union. None of these 
met with contradiction or rebuke from any Democratic journal. 
Such acquiescence under the charges and avowals is equal to full 
proof; and in the face of all these, and many others of which I 
could mention, we are not to instruct our members of Congress 
not to coalesce with the disunionist at the South ? If we are to 
vote on the Bayless resolutions, and we are to ask our Representa- 
tive not to coalesce with the Black Republicans in the organiza- 
tion ff the House, why not say also to them, touch not. the hand 
of a Southern disunionist. I can see no good reason. None has 
been offered by gentlemen upon the other side of this House. 
None I presume can or will be offered. Yet I find, Mr. Speaker, 
a disposition among gentlemen upon the other side o( tins Mouse 
to oppose this amendment, and they are seemingly astonished at 
the gentleman from Bedford [Mr. Wisener] for saying that he had 
as much respect for an abolitionist as he had for a disunionist. 
Such are, 1 have no doubt, his honest sentiments, and they are 
the sentiments of thousands South, 

I come not as the advocate of any Republican, or Black Repub- 



lican, as tney are called. No. I have no sympathy for them ; 
and as for Wm. H. Seward, I utterly detest him, and language 
fails me to express my abhorrence of him since he made his Roches- 
ter speech, and his connection with the Harper's Ferry riot. I 
endorse every word uttered in reference to him by the gentleman 
from Haywood, [Mr. Lea.] He says he is an arch traitor, and 
should be hung as high as Haman. Such I endorse. Yet what 
do we find now in Tennessee ? We find a Democratic journal, 
the Union and American, a paper that has the largest circulation 
in Tennessee, the leading journal of the Democratic party, saying 
that Seward is as good or better than Douglas ; and we find the 
name of S. A. Douglas floating at the masthead of the West Ten- 
nessee Democrat for the Presidency. A man who, says the gen- 
tleman from Haywood, is an arch traitor, &c, the leading organ 
of his party says he is as good a man for the South as Douglas, 
and that man's claims are urged by a leading Democratic journal 
for the Presidency. 

In the face of all these facts, gentlemen upon this floor say 
the Democratic party is the only party that can save the South. 
Is the election of Douglas to save the South ? Does any gentle- 
man who holds a place upon this floor say that his election will 
save the South ? Does the South believe with him upon the vital 
question that is paramount to all questions in the country ? No 
man South utters such miserable humbuggery, and yet, sir, we 
find many Democrats, and some who have places upon this floor, 
declaring if Douglas is the nominee of the Charleston convention 
they will support him. Wnat confidence can the Southern peo- 
ple have in such a partj T — a party that would forsake and desert 
every principle that is in the heart of every true Southern man*, 
and vote for a man merely for success ? That is the party we 
are told is to save the Union and vindicate the rights of the South. 
If the South depends upon and is looking for protection from 
that quarter, she is relying upon a weak, sickly and distracted 
party. 

Have we any Democratic testimony to corroborate the foregoing 
remarks ? What did the Washington Union of last March say on 
that subject? It said: "If Democracy cannot prevail against 
the Republican party it is because its organization is demoralized, 
its integrity questionable, its honor doubtful, its character bad. 
We have had enough of great men ; we want good men. Ambi- 
tious combinations are a curse to the Democratic party. They 
have tainted its integrity, demoralized it, weakened it, and ren- 
dered it a doubtful antagonist, even against the open enemies of 
the Union. They have stricken down and degraded all broad ; 
liberal, comprehensive statesmanship ; they have substituted the 
miserable device of demagogues for those great principles of gov- 
ernment, under which alone the industry of the country can be 
developed. These are the men who would control tb,e Democratic 



party. They have controlled it until; its forces are scattered, its 
a disregarded, its councils unheeded and its power contempti- 
ble." 

Such, sir, is the condition of the Democratic party to-day, and 
the writer of the above article in the Union at Washington, the 
great capitol of this grand confederacy, spoke doubtless the senti- 
ments of an honest heart. Yet, after all that has been said by 
gentlemen of large experience, and who occupy a position to 
understand, and fully understand, all about the Democratic party 
and its powers and destiny, we are told that it is the only party 
that can save the country and the South. 

Hear what a Democratic United States Senator, the Hon. A. 
G. Brown, of Mississippi, said on the 8th of this month — and I 
presume none will say he is not acquinted with the condition of 
the Democratic party. He has given his whole life to the party 
— he has grown gray in the service of the party. Among other 
things, he said : " We are told that this course on the part of the 
South (speaking of our rights in the Territories) will break up the 
National Democratic party. Well, suppose it does ; for what end 
was that party organized? In the language of the constitution, 
it was organized to establish and insure domestic tranquility, pro- 
vide for the common defence, and promote the general welfare. 
If, instead of meeting these just ends, it defeats justice, promotes 
discord, provides for the defence of the North, and promotes only 
that interest which is hostile to the South, then I have no hesita- 
tion in saying it ought to be broken up." 

Such, Mr. Speaker, are the sentiments of the distinguished 
•Democratic Senator. Does he look to the Democratic party to 
protect the rights of the South ? Has he any confidence in the 
party ? None, whatever. That is not all. We have further tes- 
timony — Democratic evidence — and I presume that will be good 
authority with my Democratic brethren on the other side of this 
house. I will not offer them Whig or Opposition testimony, for 
we have enough and to spare of Democratic testimony. The 
Charleston Mercury, a. leading Democratic journal, said: "We 
have seen nothing in National Democracy of late years which 
challenges our admiration. It has trifled with constitutional in- 
junctions ; it has aided in the passage of unjust and unequal laws ; 
it has squandered the public money; robbed the common trea- 
sury, and to foreign paupers it has given the public lands. Its 
promises have been broken, its pledges disregarded, and its pro- 
fessions falsified." And, further, the same journal said : "And 
to conclude the whole matter, National Democracy is corrupt, 
vascillating and false ; it wears the garb of sanctity, that its 
hideous deformities may be concealed; it woos but to ruin, and 
wins but to destroy." And is that the party to save this country 
and protectee rights of the South *. J Who can look to that party 



for succor and support in maintaining the perpetuity of the Union 
and to sustain and defend the rights of the South? 

Then, sir, where are we to look, whither can we go ? These 
are questions that should excite every patriot and lover of his 
common country throughout the length and breadth of the land. 
What is to save this once happy and prosperous country from the 
ambition of time serving demagogues, who have almost destroyed 
the peace, happiness, and prosperity of the best and freest people 
on God's green earth? We look for the conservative and union- 
loving men of all parties to rise up as one great and strong man, 
and smite and put down all factions who are uniting for the sake 
of success to ruin and forever destroy our happy country. Let 
party and party names give way, let platforms stand aside, let 
demagogues be hurled from place and power, and good and true 
men succeed them, and peace, tranquility, and prosperity will 
again resume their places. 

Mr. Speaker, the South has done much, sir, to encourage the 
Republicans at the North. I am sorry so to say, but frankness 
should characterize every gentleman upon this floor who may 
discuss this important subject. Sir, we find men in the South who 
had published to the world that slavery was a moral and political 
evil, and desired to live to see the day when the State of Virginia 
would be divided, and one portion become free territory; and 
after all that — after these sentiments were declared upon the floor 
of the Virginia Legislature — we find the Democratic party nomi- 
nating and elevating the author of those sentiments and declara- 
tions to the highest office within their gift. Did not that encour- 
age the Republicans North? Was that not regarded as an ex- 
pression of friendship towards them ? Did they not in their 
leading journals hail it as a bright day for Abolitionism in Vir- 
ginia? Did they not say that Virginia, the Old Dominion, the 
mother of Presidents, the home of Washington and Jefferson, had 
well nigh thrown off the yoke of slavery? Hear what one of their 
leading organs said after the election of John Letcher. 

The Boston Liberator said: 

"x\bolition Victor v in Virginia.— »The Telegraph informs us of 
the election of a Virginia Abolitionist to the office of Chief Mag- 
istrate of the Old Dominion. We were not prepared for such 
cheering news. His majority may be small, but we have abun- 
dant cause to rejoice that slavery in Virginia is on the wane. 
The Governor elect lives among the Scotch Irish in the heart of 
the State, and was the ardent advocate a few years ago of the 
abolition of slavery in Western Virginia." 

And still further, what do we hear. The New York Evening 
Post, a Democratic free soil paper, said : 

"It fills us with ioy to report the election of a conservative 
free-soiler to the important office of Governor of Virginia. Mr. 
Letcher was an advocate of emancipation in Western Virginia 



some ten or twelve years ago, though driven by apparent policy 
to palter to Eastern Virginia, it is well known that he cheerishea 
his earlier opinions, and will be encouraged by his election to re- 
sume them at an appropriate season, and his conservative free- 
soil brethren at the North hail this victory with unalloyed 
pleasure." 

Can any one say that the Abolition party have not been 
encouraged by the South. Did not Democracy know, and well 
know, that John Letcher had proclaimed this doctrine? And 
were not his sentiments published to the world? Yet they would. 
in the name of Democracy, elevate him to the highest office with- 
in their gift, over a man who loved the South and her institutions, 
who had always battled for her and her rights under the Constitu- 
tion. Yet party w r as to triumph if the victory was to fill the 
hearts of the vilest freedom-shriekers North with joy. Well may 
Southern men say that Democracy cannot save the country and 
protect the rights of the South. 

It has been said, Mr. Speaker, that this discussion was brought 
about for the purpose of making a certain man (John Bell) Presi- 
dent. Who brought it about? Not this side of the House. The 
other side introduced the resolutions; we offered an amendment, 
and if the amendment brought about the protracted debate, we 
are responsible for it. We apprehend as much danger from the 
lire-eater as we do from the Black Republicans, and I am willing 
and ready to vote for the resolutions with the amendment, not- 
withstanding I believe our Representatives will and are able to 
take care of themselves. They were elected by the same people 
that we were ; our constituents are theirs ; they are fresh from 
the people — more so than we are. We left home in September, 
they are still at home among the people, and they know better the 
sentiments of the people upon the Harper's Ferry difficulty than 
we do. It has occurred since we left our homes, and why consume 
the public time and waste the public money over this matter? 

Do gentlemen suppose that our members elect to Congress will 
do anything detrimental to the interest of Tennessee and the 
South? I hope they have a better opinion of the representatives 
elected to Congress from the Volunteer State. I believe, sir, I am 
acquainted with all of them. I have every confidence in their 
fidelity to the South. And permit me to say a word in reference 
to the distinguished gentleman who represents the first District in 
this State. I believe the South never had, never will have a truer, 
more unflinching, unwavering friend and advocate upon the floor 
of the House of Representatives. No man who knows him has 
any donbt upon that subject, and his colleagues I believe have the 
same character, and I feel that Tennessee will present an unbro- 
ken front in defense of the rights of the South. 

As to President making, which was mentioned by the gentleman 
from Sumner, (Mr. Bennett,) I have my preference. I prefer 



John Bell to any living man; and, Mr. Speaker, it is not necessary 
for mv purpose to enter into a discussion of the political history 
of that man. The history of the country is his history. He has 
been too long and favorably known fur me or any.other gentleman 
upon this floor to add an inch to his political stature. He soars 
above the reach of the futile attempts to take one page from the 
history of his greatness. Many malignant darts have been, and 
are still being hurled at him, but they have and will fall harmless 
at his feet. A country may run mad, demagogues may succeed and 
hurl gieat men from power, but when the fury shall have passed 
away, and judgment occupies the throne, justice will be restored, 
and with it good and true men be reinstated and elevated. But, 
sir, if John Bell is not the choice of the Union party of the coun- 
try, I am for any good, true conservative man, one that can calm 
the turbid waters and restore our government to its former purity. 
I care not for names, all I desire is to assist in elevating a good 
and reliable man to the Presidency, 

Gentlemen may make light of this Union ; those who are 
raised in times of peace, who know but little of the hardships and 
sufferings of the old patriots of the Revolution, half clad, half 
fed, and who slept upon the ground covered by the heavens alone, 
whose march was indicated by the blood " which oozed from their 
feet as they traveled over the frozen ground;" to them the Union 
was worth much. I need not talk of the value of this Union ; fig- 
ures would fail to enumerate, the mind cannot comprehend it. 
All lovers of their ancestry, lovers of their country, lovers of their 
Washington, and those who assisted him in establishing this Un- 
ion, and all of any party who love their country, will join in say- 
ing, let parties, let platforms, let factions and would-be-rulers and 
dictators go ; let us preserve this Union, and let us hand it down 
to our children, as our fathers handed it down to us. 









• 



<f 



